5 ms·

False dilemma fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma You can't attribute the existence of "jobs" exclus

False dilemma fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma You can't attribute the existence of "jobs" exclusively to "businesses" or exclusively to "consumers", because "trade" definitionally requires the existence of two parties.

TDL 14y ago
Thank you. It always irritates me when complex (or at least somewhat complex) issues are boiled down to simplistic notions.
- rhizome 14y ago
  Yet taxes on the rich are indeed cut in real life via this exact rationale.
powrtoch 14y ago
I don't think this is the issue addressed in the talk though. The question he was responding to was "does having lower taxes on the rich create jobs?". He argues that it does not, but that lowering taxes on the lower and middle class probably would. It's not about putting all the blame on one side or the other, it's about the factual question of whether a particular policy improves or worsens the job situation.
- davidhollander 14y ago
  He argues that position by repeatedly making the assertion that consumers create jobs and businesses do not: > only consumers can set in motion this virtuous cycle of increasing demand and hiring. >the true job creators are consumers It's a tad nonsensical, all economic exchanges definitionally require the existence of two parties to occur, both parties are essential regardless of the good or service being traded. One can easily take the opposite position to the speaker, that production precedes consumption, because in the state of nature man must first produce and labor for his or her own survival before surplus exists with which to trade. Either way, it's not a sufficient basis for asserting normative proposals in regards to tax policy.
thwest 14y ago
Is this comment intended to be a critique of the speech, or in concurrence with the speech?
hnal943 14y ago
This of course true. Except in our economy, isn't the onus on the businesses to attract customers? I would say that therefore businesses are more responsible for job creation (because they are the ones creating value) than consumers who are merely determining which businesses have the best offerings. The only thing I can see not working this way would be an extreme version of kickstarter, where consumers would put out a bounty for a specific product or service and have businesses form to provide it. At that point, they would be more actively "creating jobs."

TDL 14y ago

Thank you. It always irritates me when complex (or at least somewhat complex) issues are boiled down to simplistic notions.

rhizome 14y ago
Yet taxes on the rich are indeed cut in real life via this exact rationale.

powrtoch 14y ago

I don't think this is the issue addressed in the talk though. The question he was responding to was "does having lower taxes on the rich create jobs?". He argues that it does not, but that lowering taxes on the lower and middle class probably would. It's not about putting all the blame on one side or the other, it's about the factual question of whether a particular policy improves or worsens the job situation.

davidhollander 14y ago
He argues that position by repeatedly making the assertion that consumers create jobs and businesses do not: > only consumers can set in motion this virtuous cycle of increasing demand and hiring. >the true job creators are consumers It's a tad nonsensical, all economic exchanges definitionally require the existence of two parties to occur, both parties are essential regardless of the good or service being traded. One can easily take the opposite position to the speaker, that production precedes consumption, because in the state of nature man must first produce and labor for his or her own survival before surplus exists with which to trade. Either way, it's not a sufficient basis for asserting normative proposals in regards to tax policy.

thwest 14y ago

Is this comment intended to be a critique of the speech, or in concurrence with the speech?

hnal943 14y ago

This of course true. Except in our economy, isn't the onus on the businesses to attract customers? I would say that therefore businesses are more responsible for job creation (because they are the ones creating value) than consumers who are merely determining which businesses have the best offerings. The only thing I can see not working this way would be an extreme version of kickstarter, where consumers would put out a bounty for a specific product or service and have businesses form to provide it. At that point, they would be more actively "creating jobs."